Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

German High Command offered to turn Wehrmacht against Waffen-SS


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 PzJgr

PzJgr

    Drill Instructor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,079 posts
  • LocationJefferson, OH

User's Awards

2   

Posted 05 June 2009 - 12:51 PM

Oh my is this the Jewish version of the Daily Mail? Where did they dig up this bone?

http://reformjudaism...dex.cfm?id=1484

It is rather difficult to believe since the German Generals did not want a repeat of the 'stab in the back' from WWI. They did not want the General Staff to become the blame for the loss of the war. I don't know about this one.
Stug2.jpg

 


#2 DocCasualty

DocCasualty

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 486 posts
  • LocationNorthern Michigan

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:44 PM

Very interesting, however, even if an attempt to proceed had been undertaken, I think it's highly speculative as to what would have happened. Would the Wehrmacht have followed the mutineers, against their sworn oath to the Fuhrer? What would have been the upshot with the Soviets? Sounds like a good "what if?" though.



"Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl." - Frederic II of Prussia
"In 9 months and 3 days of combat on the Continent the 949th FA Bn had fired 51,000 rounds of ammunition, approximately 2,550 tons." - Unit History


#3 PzJgr

PzJgr

    Drill Instructor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,079 posts
  • LocationJefferson, OH

User's Awards

2   

Posted 05 June 2009 - 03:56 PM

This is why it is difficult for me to accept because of the General Staff taking their oath very serious.

What would be interesting is if it did take place, this would be prior to the Tehran Conference where the allies agreed to unconditional surrender on all fronts. This brings the question, what would the allies do and how would the Russians react?
Stug2.jpg

 


#4 C.Evans

C.Evans

    Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,883 posts

Posted 07 June 2009 - 05:36 AM

One wonders why they even bother to make up these things? I highly doubt the other branches of the Wehrmacht would suddenly "turn" on their Waffen SS branch. I think this is a lame attempt at spreading more "dis-information" - meaning whoever wrote that piece for the daily mail.
Lost are only those, who abandon themselves) Hans-Ulrich Rudel.
:snoopy: :ww1ace:
Posted Image

#5 Kai-Petri

Kai-Petri

    Kenraali

  • ModeratorsOKF Moderator
  • 20,310 posts

User's Awards

2   

Posted 07 June 2009 - 03:28 PM

And von Rundstedt the leader of this mutiny? Tell me when to stop laughing. Anyone else but him!
Posted Image

#6 brndirt1

brndirt1

    Saddle Tramp

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,709 posts

Posted 07 June 2009 - 05:47 PM

This is why it is difficult for me to accept because of the General Staff taking their oath very serious.

What would be interesting is if it did take place, this would be prior to the Tehran Conference where the allies agreed to unconditional surrender on all fronts. This brings the question, what would the allies do and how would the Russians react?


I agree on the officer's oath being a great hinderance to this plan, but with that in mind I believe you mean the 1943 Jan.-Feb Casablanca Conference, not the 1943 Nov. Dec. Tehran Conference since that was the one where "Unconditional Surrender" was first set out as policy, and was half a year ahead of this alleged meeting with the OSS.

CASABLANCA CONFERENCE COMMUNIQUÉ

(An excerpt dealing with plans for "Unconditional Surrender", January 24, 1943)

Source:
Pamphlet No. 4, PILLARS OF PEACE
Documents Pertaining To American Interest In Establishing A Lasting World Peace:
January 1941-February 1946
Published by the Book Department, Army Information School,
Carlisle Barracks, Pa., May 1946

...For ten days the combined staffs have been in constant session, meeting two or three times a day and recording progress at intervals to the President and Prime Minister.

The entire field of the war was surveyed theater by theater throughout the world, and all resources were marshalled for a more intense prosecution of the war by sea, land and air.

Nothing like this prolonged discussion between two allies has ever taken place before. Complete agreement was reached between the leaders of the two countries and their respective staffs upon war plans and enterprises to be undertaken during the campaigns of 1943 against Germany, Italy and Japan with a view to drawing the utmost advantage from the markedly favorable turn of events at the close of 1942.

Premier Stalin was cordially invited to meet the President and Prime Minister, in which case the meeting would have been held very much farther to the east. He was unable to leave Russia at this time on account of the great offensive which he himself, as Commander in Chief, is directing.

The President and the Prime Minister realized up to the full the enormous weight of the war which Russia is successfully bearing along her whole land front, and their prime object has been to draw as much weight as possible off the Russian armies by engaging the enemy as heavily as possible at the best selected Points.

(Page 9 )

Premier Stalin has been fully informed of the military proposals.

The President and Prime Minister have been in communication with Generalissimo Chiang Kai-Shek. They have apprised him of the measures which they are undertaking to assist him in China's magnificent and unrelaxing struggle for the common cause.

The occasion of the meeting between the President and Prime Minister made it opportune to invite General Giraud (General Henri Honoré Giraud, High Commissioner of French Africa) to confer with the combined Chiefs of Staff and to arrange for a meeting between him and General de Gaulle (General Charles de Gaulle, Fighting French Commander). The two generals have been in close consultation.

The President and Prime Minister and their combined staffs, having completed their plans for the offensive campaigns of 1943, have now separated in order to put them into active and concerted execution.

The general objectives before the conferees were clear. At a press conference at the close of the sessions the President outlined them as follows:

1. To maintain the initiative obtained in the closing days of 1942 and to extend it.
2. To dispatch all aids to the Russian front with the objectives of whittling down German manpower and munitions.
3. To send assistance to the Chinese armies.
4. To unite the French in a war against the Axis.

Borrowing a phrase from a letter of Gen. U. S. Grant to the Confederate Commander of Forts Henry and Donelson during the American Civil War, the President called the sessions the "unconditional surrender" conference. The one hope for peace he asserted, lay in depriving Germany and Japan of all military power.

See:

CASABLANCA CONFERENCE COMMUNIQUÉ

And here is a section of FDR’s radio address in which he again points out the

"Unconditional Surrender" policy;

"...In an attempt to ward off the inevitable disaster, the Axis propagandist are trying all of their old tricks in order to divide the United Nations. They seek to create the idea that if we win this war, Russia, England, China, and the United States are going to get into a cat-and-dog fight.

This is their final effort to turn one nation against another, in the vain hope that they may settle with one or two at a time-that any of us may be so gullible and so forgetful as to be duped into making "deals" at the expense of our Allies.

To these panicky attempts to escape the consequences of their crimes we say-all the United Nations say-that the only terms on which we shall deal with an Axis government or any Axis factions are the terms proclaimed at Casablanca: "Unconditional Surrender." In our uncompromising policy we mean no harm to the common people of the Axis nations. But we do mean to impose punishment and retribution in full upon their guilty, barbaric leaders...

See:

CASABLANCA CONFERENCE, Feb 12, 1943

The Tehran Conference didn’t really declare the "no separate peace", but may have re-enforced it and "Unconditional Surrender" in the official notes. However, that was not disclosed nor emphasized in the official announcement concerning the Conference agreements released on Dec. 1st 1943.

See:

The Avalon Project : The Tehran Conference

And I also found the minutes of the Casablanca Conference which were taken between formal meetings, and contrary to Churchill's later claim that he was "surprised" by FDR's unconditional surrender announcement, he had participated in those same meetings. I believe he was surprised by FDR's timing of making it in public before he could get back and confer with his own government and then make the announcement in tandem so these two allies came across as more "equal", and not placing Great Britian in the subservient position of having to just "nod and agree" for the cameras. Just my take, but I'll do some searching around in my old files and see if I can find the minutes and a link to them.

  • C.Evans and Wolfy like this
Happy Trails,
Clint.

#7 C.Evans

C.Evans

    Expert

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,883 posts

Posted 07 June 2009 - 05:56 PM

And von Rundstedt the leader of this mutiny? Tell me when to stop laughing. Anyone else but him!



My sentiments exactly my friend. G.v.Rundstedt was too a professional of an officer to take part in a throw-over.
Lost are only those, who abandon themselves) Hans-Ulrich Rudel.
:snoopy: :ww1ace:
Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users